Wikiality talk:Policy
This chart is so, so helpful! Thank you.--thisniss 05:08, 17 February 2007 (UTC) :The chart is helpful, but not set in stone, it can and will be adjusted to include any new strains of vandalism, etc. All admins are asked to adjust it...--WatchTVEatDonutDrinkBeer 05:13, 17 February 2007 (UTC) I'm always in favor of the kind & gentle approach, but then I am a commie.--doggies 04:50, 15 February 2007 (UTC) We should base the levels on the terror alert scale. :D--Esteban Colberto 04:09, 15 February 2007 (UTC) :I was just copying/pasting from old pages. Originally it was supposed to be similar to Stephen's Levels of Judegment, but hanks for the input, yours is much truthier than it was.--WatchTVEatDonutDrinkBeer 04:11, 15 February 2007 (UTC) ::I feel we should get some more templates at the "lower levels." The ones we have feel very abrasive, and for someone who is new, who may not know what "Un-Colbert Content" is, being slapped with a "NWTF" seems way harsher than getting an "On Notice." "On Notice" explains what it is much more effectively, without making the person feel stupid, wrong, bad, etc. If the first thing I'd ever written got a "NWTF" on it, I would never have come back, because I would have figured that everyone here was an asshole and that they didn't want me around. ::Obviously, some of the articles that get "NWTF" tags are genuine vanity, idiocy, or vandalism. But some people just take a while to warm up, and if they see their work tagged this way, they might feel like they don't have the time or space here to do so. Anyway, I'm realizing that I may have accidentally killed some articles too early by going for a "Notice" tag instead of a "NWTF" because the "Notice" tag actually seems less severe to me because it doesn't assume that the person whose article gets "tagged" already knows what it means.--thisniss 04:44, 15 February 2007 (UTC) :::We do have "fix" and "wag"--WatchTVEatDonutDrinkBeer 04:46, 15 February 2007 (UTC) ::::I'm think that could be a green, low level warning on the terror scale.--Esteban Colberto 04:51, 15 February 2007 (UTC) :::Oh, and there is always the tried and true "vanity"--WatchTVEatDonutDrinkBeer 04:53, 15 February 2007 (UTC) ::::Vanity I know what to do with. The pages that I'm talking about are the ones where you get the sense that the writer wants to make a connection, but they're just not there yet. Or you're just not sure what the connection is. Sometimes it might just be hard to see at first glance, where some different eyes or some more time might help the page emerge. ::::Template:Fix turns the page into a "Stub", which doesn't automatically follow, and it also categorizes as "Too Facty", which is not usually the problem with a "NWTF" or "On Notice" class article. Template:SCwag is good if the problem is mostly SPG. I tend to go for Template:Random or Template:Wha as my "first line of defence" against the weird/untruthy pages rather than Template:NWTF, but then I still sometimes see them get deleted from there.--thisniss 05:10, 15 February 2007 (UTC) ::Tagging pages is always up to the discretion of the tagger. If you feel the person is trying to make a connection, then do what you always do: talk to them. Remind them that they can tag a page "UC" while they work on it. If you feel "fix" shouldn't have "stub" as a target category, then you may change it, or make a similar tag with a different target category. (Like warn, warn, 1, etc)--WatchTVEatDonutDrinkBeer 05:28, 15 February 2007 (UTC)